Speakers

Speakers

JOINT DEFENSE OF MASS TORT/PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION – TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Join this panel for an insightful conversation.  Topics to be addressed include:

  • Coordination among (i) business partners within the chain of distribution and (ii) entities within the same industry (e.g., retailers of similar products)
  • Independent counsel – identity/alignment of interests
  • Insurance/indemnity issues
  • Joint defense and confidentiality agreements
  • Cross-claims and third-party claims
  • Coordinating discovery and pre-trial/trial strategy
  • Utilizing industry organizations to assist with strategy, amicus briefs, etc.
Robert Alpert

Robert Alpert, Esq.
Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP

Paul Benson

Paul E. Benson, Esq.
Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

TRENDS IN TALC AND PFAS LITIGATION, AND REGULATIONS TO WATCH IN 2024

Sarahann Rackl

Sarahann Rackl Ph.D., P.E.
Principal Engineer – Environmental and Earth Sciences
Exponent

LIFE IN THE GRAY AREA – PRODUCT LIABILITY ISSUES SURROUNDING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Mario Madden


Mario Madden, Esq.
Assistant General Counsel
Microsoft

Lora Spencer


Lora Spencer, Esq.
Principal Global Litigation & Investigations Counsel
Medtronic

Roberta Feiten Silva


Roberta Feiten Silva, Esq.
Souto Correa Advogados Associados

Jim Frederick


Jim Frederick, Esq. – Moderator
Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

THE FUTURE OF MDL LITIGATION

Hon. J. Philip Calabrese

Hon. J. Philip Calabrese
United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio

Hon. Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr.

Hon. Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr.
United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee

AMICUS PROGRAM - 2023 YEAR IN REVIEW: Hot Topics, Developments and Emerging Issues

Paul Alarcón


Paul Alarcón, Esq.
Bowman & Brooke LLP

Michael Brooks


L. Michael Brooks, Jr., Esq.
Wells, Anderson & Race, LLC

Dave Geiger


David R. Geiger, Esq.
Foley Hoag LLP

Jonathan M. Hoffman


Jonathan M. Hoffman, Esq.
MB Law Group LLP

Wendy Lumish


Wendy F. Lumish, Esq.
Bowman & Brooke LLP

Jamison Power


Jamison Power, Esq.
Hyundai Motor America

RUNNING FROM THEIR BURDEN:  The Resurgence of the No-Injury Plaintiffs’ Use of Class Actions  

Lori Cohen


Lori G. Cohen, Esq.
Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Peter Pliszka


Peter Pliszka, Esq.
Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP

APPELLATE REVIEW

Jeff Cohen


Jeffrey A. Cohen, Esq.
Carlton Fields

Todd Croftchik


Todd A. Croftchik, Esq.
Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.

Lisa Floro

Lisa Floro, Esq.
Vice President, General Counsel, Global Litigation
Coloplast

David Walz

David J. Walz, Esq.
Carlton Fields

DEBUNKING THE UNSOUND METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING FIRE CAUSATION IN A LITHIUM-ION BATTERY

This presentation will review the current theories utilized by Plaintiffs experts to establish causation as well as review the state of the scientific literature and testing regarding the ability to determine when a lithium-ion battery cell is the cause as opposed to the victim of the fire—and how to fight such claims in light of public perception concerning the potential volatility of lithium-ion products and unscientific ipsi dixit claims of causation. 

Jonathan Barton


Jonathan T. Barton, Esq.
Stanton | Barton LLC

WINNING (OR LOSING) THE CASE OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM: Legislative and Rules Reforms that Make a Difference

Learn about impactful changes that state legislatures have made in Michigan, Montana, Florida and Iowa to alter aspects of product liability law, and get updated on federal and state rules amendments that have recently been adopted or are underway.  Understand how those changes originated, and discover what we as defense lawyers can do to affect those developments in a positive way.

Lee Mickus


Lee Mickus, Esq.
Evans Fears Schuttert McNulty Mickus

EXPANDING PRODUCT LIABILITY LAW? Gilead Science and the Duty to Innovate

Phil Goldberg

Phil Goldberg, Esq. – Moderator
Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

Susanna Moldoveanu

Susanna M. Moldoveanu, Esq.
Butler Snow LLP

Chris Spencer

Christopher C. Spencer, Esq.
The Product Liability Consultancy

Andrew Tauber

Andrew Tauber, Esq.
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP

COMPUTER MODELING AND PLAINTIFFS ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OBLIGATIONS

In most jurisdictions plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing a reasonable or practical alternative design.  Increasingly, plaintiffs are relying on the defendant’s own computer-aided engineering or finite element modeling in order to establish a proposed alternative for a particular product or component part.  This tactic provides a shortcut for plaintiffs’ alternative proposal and can be developed without the need for costly testing.  This segment explores the tactics relied upon in discovery and at trial, and offers strategies to limit these efforts.

Tom Bazemore

Tom Bazemore, Esq.
Huie, Fernambucq & Stewart

Sarah Easley

Sarah Easley, Ph.D., P.E.
Senior Managing Engineer – Mechanical Engineering
Exponent

DEVELOPING ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR AUTOMATED VEHICLES BASED ON DUTY OF CARE

Public expectations for automated vehicles span a broad range, from mobility for passengers, to road user safety, to compliance with the traffic code. In most ordinary situations, these expectations can be satisfied simultaneously. But these various expectations can also lead to exceptional scenarios where certain objectives, such as those related to safety, are in tension with road rules. Exceptional driving scenarios challenge motion planning algorithms in automated vehicles to find solutions that are legally grounded, ethically sound, and technically feasible.
Read More

Christian Gerdes

J. Christian Gerdes, Ph.D.
Co-Director of the Center for Automotive Research at Stanford (CARS)
Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Emeritus
Stanford University